Sunday, September 29, 2019

Joseph4GI's Twitter Penis Polls


Touched off by a poll regarding penile lubrication and circumcised men I saw on Twitter, I decided to start my own series of polls, just for fun.

Originally, my intention was to make a better poll that included intact men, but then I thought, well why not try other fun stuff as well?

Circumcision Status and Use of Artificial Lubrication
The first poll concerns lubrication and circumcision status.

It is often assumed that circumcised men are more than likely to use artificial lubrication, such as KY jelly or other material, for sexual activity, including insertive intercourse with a partner and/or masturbation, than intact men.

There might be some truth to this, as the mucous membranes of the glans and inner foreskin remnants of the circumcised penis are dried out, hardened and rough due to the layers of keratin built up over time, while in the intact male, these are moist and supple.




So how true is this?

To see how true this assumption is, I posted the following poll questions on Twitter:

Poll A
Please answer only if you are, or if your partner is circumcised. For intact, please see Poll B. For maximum sample size, please retweet.

How often do you use commercial lubrication (e.g. KY, Astroglide or Alboline) for sex and/or masturbation?

Poll B

Please answer only if you are, or if your partner is intact. For circumcised, please see Poll A. For maximum sample size, please retweet.

How often do you use commercial lubrication (e.g. KY, Astroglide or Alboline) for sex and/or masturbation?

Respondents can each answer one of the following:

Essential
Often, but not essential
Only sometimes
Never

Now, I only posted this yesterday, and the poll is still ongoing, but here is what I have so far:



So far 72 circumcised males or their partners have voted in Poll A, and 38% have said lubrication is essential for their masturbation and/or lovemaking. 24% of them said they never use it, which I find a little hard to believe. 24% responded that they use lubrication often, but it isn't essential, and 15% said they use lubrication only sometimes.

Contrast this with the intact males who responded; only 7% of them say artificial lubrication is essential. In stark contrast, 67% of them say they never use lubrication when masturbating or having sex. 5% say they use it often, but it is not essential, while 21% say they use it only sometimes.

Now, polls are still fresh, so this could change. I'm going to embed the polls here so Twitter users can answer them.








Drugs and/or Devices to Maintain an Erection
After posting these, I also got the idea of finding out what users are more likely to use drugs, such as Viagra, or devices, such as cock rings or penis pumps, to maintain an erection.

Many of us believe that circumcised men are more than likely to use Viagra or penile devices to stay hard, than intact men, because of the keratinization and desensitization over time.

So why not ask on Twitter to see what men are actually doing? I thought...

Now, Twitter's poll feature is very limited, so I've had to play with it a little bit to get it to work how I want it to. So here's what I came up with the the next poll: A two-parter!

So in the above fashion, I've made two, separate two-part polls; one for intact and one for circumcised men. One question asks how often men use Viagra or devices to maintain an erection, the other asks what age range they're in.

So here are the numbers for circumcised respondents so far:


Again, as the poll is still new, there are very few respondents.

It looks as though most respondents never really use Viagra or penile devices to maintain an erection. Then again, the greater number of respondents are within the 25-20 year age range. Few past 51. The others are young, thus probably still very virile.

The assumption I was challenging here is the idea that circumcised men become desensitized and are more likely to need Viagra or the aid of a penis pump or cock ring to maintain an erection as they get older.

Here are the numbers for intact males:



The numbers seem skewed against my assumption when comparing intact vs circumcised men.

More intact respondents indicated that Viagra or a device was essential than circumcised respondents. (17% intact vs 12% circumcised) More circumcised respondents responded "Never" than intact respondents. (78% vs 52%)

But look too at the age of the respondents; more intact men in the 26-50 and 51-75 age ranges responded than in the 25 or younger age range. In contrast, there were more circumcised respondents in the 25 or younger age range, the age where they would still have fairly robust erections; ED may be more related to age than circumcision status.

Again, the poll is still rather early and the sample size still very small, so these numbers could change.

One thing I forgot to ask, but it's a little late to add, is whether or not the men smoke, because circumcision status and age are only two pieces of the ED puzzle; other factors, such as smoking, how much sleep they get, and how often they have sex or masturbate may also affect whether or not a man is able to maintain an erection. Perhaps in a future poll.

I have embedded the polls below so Twitter users can respond.

 Use of Viagra, Penis Pumps or other devices to maintain an erection
Circumcised Edition





 Use of Viagra, Penis Pumps or other devices to maintain an erection
Intact Edition








Have you ever seen your father's Penis?
This poll was touched off by a conversation I saw on Facebook; some mothers want to know precisely how much does a child being a different circumcision status from his father affect their relationship.


A common pretext used to pressure parents in to having their child circumcised is that a child ought to be circumcised if the father is, the rationale being that having a different circumcision status than one's father may affect the way they bond together.

So I asked the following questions:

This is for guys out there.
Have you ever seen your father’s penis? Could you tell whether he was circumcised or not?

 How old were you when you saw your father’s penis?

 This is for guys who answered that they noticed their father’s circumcision status was different than theirs.

How did “being different” affect your relationship with your father?

(Space is limited, so neg = negatively, pos = positively, NE no effect)

Here's what I have so far:





So far almost half of the respondents have never actually seen their father's penis. Most who have saw their father's penis in childhood, between the ages of 1 and 10. A very small percentage, so far, saw their father naked over the age of 21.

Your blogger can tell you right now, he has never seen his father naked. Not sure I want to, either.

And, of those who have responded so far, the most noticeable thing about their fathers' penises are that they were bigger.

Circumcision status was noticeable for some, but when adding the percentages of those who noticed their father's pubic hair or didn't really think much of the experience, circumcision status was not so outstanding.

The poll is still pretty young though, so there haven't been very many respondents, and these results could change; only two votes on father/son bonding experience.

I'm going to embed the Tweets here and Twitter users can respond.









I'd like to point out here, that when circumcision first began in the United States, no one was circumcised, so all children would have been different from their fathers. This rationale wouldn't have worked then.




Locker Room Poll
And finally, a poll I put together just now regarding American intact guys and the locker room experience. 

Another common rationale circumcision advocates use to convince parents to have their child circumcised is that he'll be made fun of in the locker room.

Well, let's see what the situation may actually look like.

The poll is only just starting, so there aren't very many respondents. Twitter users can click below to take the poll.









Conclusion
These polls are informal and can't compare to an actual rigorous study, but they hopefully will give us a ballpark to work with, and I hope this sets the groundwork for any researchers out there that want to look into these matters, and hopefully they can come up with more definitive numbers.

As of today (9/29/2019) the polls are ongoing and close in about 6 days or so. I encourage readers to please share this link wherever they can for a better sample size.
Posted by at 4 comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, September 11, 2019

When Someone Says It's Not the Money...

It's the money.


One of the biggest incentives for American doctors to promote and perform circumcisions on healthy, non-consenting infants is that it's easy money.

And yet whenever this is mentioned, people tend to downplay this factor.

"Doctors don't make much from circumcisions," some will say.

"What doctors make from circumcisions is nil," say others.

So how much does a circumcision cost?

It depends on who you ask, and it depends on what fraction of the cost is being reported.

Parents who want to have their child circumcised get quoted small-time three-digit numbers, ranging from 100 to 400 US dollars.

This doesn't sound like much, but then the question is, is this the full cost?

Is this only what parents pay out-of-pocket and the rest is covered through a co-pay system?

The last time I checked, at least one doctor in Canada charges up to 450 dollars Canadian a pop.

In an article released not too long ago, one doctor says he charges $700.

In this same article it is mentioned that after insurances pay, hospitals in Alaska still collect 340 dollars, which raises the question of how much exactly are insurance companies paying?

According to this article, at least one hospital, Alaska Regional, charges $2,110 per circumcision.

Given this figure, at 1.4 million babies being circumcised a year, American hospitals can be making as much as $2,954,000,000 on circumcision alone.

I thought $2,110 was a lot of money for circumcision, but it turns out this figure may actually be modest.

I recently ran across this revealing Tweet:



Here's a screen shot in case it gets deleted:



It is estimated that 1.4 American baby boys are being circumcised a year.

This means that, at $7,000 per circumcision, American hospitals can be making as much as $9,800,000,000 annually on circumcision alone.

To which I ask skeptics; you still think it isn't the money?

It's no wonder doctors and nurses gush on and on about male infant circumcision; there is money to be made, and hospitals make promoting male infant circumcision to parents their policy.

Reaping profit from non-medical surgery on healthy, non-consenting individuals already constitutes medical fraud.

This has got to be the biggest medical scam in American history, and sooner or later those who perpetuate it will be held responsible.

Posted by at 1 comment:
Labels: , , , ,

Sunday, August 11, 2019

Update 2019


I'd like to apologize for keeping readers waiting.

Recently, I've become very busy, so busy that I have been unable to post.

I tried to commit to writing at least one post a month, but even that is proving to be very difficult.

Believe it or not, your blogger has a life.

He is married, a father of three boys and works virtually around the clock.

After my paying job, I come home to bathe the children and put them to sleep.

It's difficult to find the energy to devote to the extensive, well-thought-out posts I want to write.

No, this is not good-bye; I don't plan on giving up on this blog, or on the intactivist cause any time soon.

Even though I don't have too much time to devote to intactivism, this cause is still at the back of my mind, and I do what I can to further it, though these days, it's very limited.

I just want to say that although I'll try to write once a month, unfortunately, due to the current circumstances, it will not always be possible, so I apologize to my readers for not being as active on this blog as I'd like.

Here are some areas in which I'm rather active though:


Twitter
Though I'm often the victim of censorship, I'm very active on Twitter, rectifying foreskin falsehoods wherever I can.

It never ceases to amaze me how people openly post their "parenting decisions" on social media for all to see, and yet have the audacity to tell those who comment to "mind their own business."



Yeah, note to intrepid parents out there who openly post about having circumcised their sons; if you don't want people commenting on your poor parenting decisions, posting them on Twitter, Facebook or any other social media is prrrrobably not a good idea.

Just a thought...

ANYWAY, follow me on twitter if you're interested on reading my ramblings @Joseph4GI

IntactiWiki
I'd like to take a moment to promote intactiwiki.org.

A few years ago, a number of people thought it would be a great idea to start a wiki to upload factual information regarding the penis, circumcision and anatomically correct male human anatomy.

We noticed that there was a particular gatekeeper at Wikipedia skewing every single article concerning the penis in favor of male infant circumcision.

Any edit made to talk about the negatives of circumcision was immediately reverted by a user whose real name is Jake Waskett.

This user did a lot of underhanded things to protect pages related to the penis and circumcision, such as revert any edits he didn't like, block IP addresses to keep others from editing these pages, and erase his own history on Wikipedia to avoid being tracked.

 It looked as if there was simply no way edit Wikipedia, so one person started a page at a free wiki site which would act as a repository for all this information which could one day be uploaded to Wikipedia once this Waskett person was stopped.

We started running into trouble, because the wiki was reported as "hateful" and "anti-semitic," so it had to be moved to a more secure server.

Readers wouldn't know this, but two or three companies refused to host the wiki for unknown reasons; we suspect it was all the same; the companies didn't want to host this wiki for fear of being labeled "antisemitic" or what not.

We finally found someone who would host this wiki with no problem.

The end result was a wiki called "IntactWiki."

Problems arose when the one member with any programming knowledge left the group; he was simply too busy with other projects; none of us knew how to take care of a Wiki, let alone work out bugs that made editing difficult, so even though at long last we established a wiki for intactivism, it remained stagnant for most of its life.

That is until now.

I started noticing references to a website called "IntactiWiki" on Facebook. The articles were better-researched and more up-to-date than our own, so I became curious about was behind it.

 We finally connected, and after conversing about or wikis, we came to a decision.

There can't be *two* wikis, that would be confusing.

Also IntactWiki had become derelict; nobody was updating or taking care of it.


And so it was decided that IntactWiki would meld into IntactiWiki to become the one Wiki to rule them all; one Wiki to bind them.

And so I'm proud to announce IntactiWiki.org.




All pages from IntactWiki now live there and are ready for others to update and make current.

There are also newer articles.

For information that has otherwise been made inaccessible on Wikipedia due to pro-circumcision gatekeepers, intactivists and others interested in learning complete, unadulterated information concerning genital anatomy and forced genital cutting, should visit IntactiWiki.org.

Other projects...
As I've said, I'm a busy father, so what I can do for intactivism is rather limited, but in addition to commentary on Twitter, I'll also continue to try and post on this blog. That's about as much as I can do for now.

I can't wait for the day when male infant circumcision is finally recognized for the medical fraud and gross human rights violation that it is.

Related Posts:
If You Can't Stand the Heat, STAY OFF THE NET
Posted by at No comments:

Saturday, July 6, 2019

Facebook Censoring Intactivism


This morning, I woke up to this post on my Facebook news feed:


Apparently, Facebook is censoring Doctors Opposing Circumcision and information about circumcision deaths. According DOC, Facebook removed many educational graphics they created without any notification.

Furthermore, they are not allowing the DOC website to be shared on their platform.

I myself have experienced censorship on Facebook.

Not too long ago, I created a page to address the fact that most American textbooks on health and human anatomy graphically depict the penis as circumcised, and if the foreskin is even mentioned at all, it is described as "that extra flap of skin covering the penis which is removed during circumcision." No actual pictures of the human penis were posted, only the hand-drawn graphics published in the textbooks, which show the penis dissected in many different ways for educational purposes, but apparently that was enough for Facebook to take down the whole page.

It would be very easy for critics to lump us in with the anti-vaxx movement, and thus use it as grounds to censor us, however vaccination has been scientifically proven to strengthen the immune system against pathogens that cause disease. They do not remove any flesh from the body, and, they are actually recommended by every respected medical organization, unlike circumcision.

Unless there is medical indication, and/or the individual consents, all surgery is abuse, medical fraud and mutilation. It prevents as much disease as blood letting and head trepanation.

If there were any justice, it would be pro-circ groups and websites who would be censored, because they spread much misinformation that takes an unfounded position against the most respected medical organizations in the west.

This wouldn't be the first time I've experienced censorship on social media for challenging male infant circumcision; not too long ago I was on Twitter, and the platform would not even let me post the following Tweet:



There is a problem when those who run social media platforms decide certain narratives shouldn't be challenged.

Intactivists aren't even publishing controversial, misleading information.

There is a problem when Facebook censors well-documented information, citations of medical journals and references to the most respected medical organizations in the world.

I can only surmise that information is taken down whenever someone, or some group reports it as being "offensive."

Which raises the question:

Are scientifically demonstrable facts going to be censored every time somebody finds them "offensive?"

Related Posts:
Circumcision Censorship at Twitter?

Doctors Opposing Circumcision:
Facebook Page

Website
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

FLORIDA: AdventHealth Uses Circumcision as Incentive for Heart of Florida Maternity Patients



Come for the birth, stay for the circumcision!

Up until recently, Heart of Florida Health Center maternity patients on Medicaid had to travel 40 miles to Gainsville to have their babies. But now, according to an article published on Ocala Star Banner, they can deliver at AdventHealth Ocala starting in August.

The article reads almost like a paid advertisement put out by AdventHealth, a healthcare system spanning 10 states. They have recently acquired the lease for the Ocala facility from another group called Community Health Systems and are using circumcision as an incentive to attract customers.

"The deal also will bring in-house circumcision services back to AdventHealth Ocala, which the hospital's previous operator stopped providing several years ago," reads the article. No question as to why the previous operator stopped providing circumcision in the first place.
 According to AdventHealth Ocala spokeswoman. Richelle Hoenes-Ahearn, "This procedure was not offered prior to AdventHealth acquiring the hospital. However, we have plans for our medical teams to provide circumcision at AdventHealth Ocala within the next several weeks." 
The article goes on:
Heart of Florida CEO Jamie Ulmer said he only recently learned circumcision was not available at AdventHealth Ocala. Those with private insurance were able to get the procedure done outside of the hospital, but no local doctors will accept Medicaid for circumcision services. That left mothers scrambling to find a provider outside the area before the Medicaid cut-off time for the procedure, which is 27 days after birth. After that, babies have to wait for months before Medicaid will cover the procedure.

"As part of the collaboration we worked out, all babies will be able to get circumcisions at the hospital before they leave," he said.

Which raises the question; shouldn't public health coffers be used only for medically necessary procedures? Why aren't doctors accepting medicaid for circumcisions, and how is the Heart of Florida/AdventHealth deal getting around this?
"No one is saying your baby has to have a circumcision, but having the choice is first and foremost. How can you make a decision if you don't even have a choice?" Ulmer says, but here again, questions arise.

In any other case, reaping profit from non-medical surgery on healthy, non-consenting individuals constitutes medical fraud.

Without medical or clinical indication, can doctors even be performing surgery on healthy, non-consenting minors, let alone be giving parents any kind of "choice?"

Ignored here is the fact that a child is being deprived of his choice on a permanent, non-therapeutic surgical alteration on his body.

If "religious freedom" and "parental choice" are going to be cited here, does the CEO intend on extending similar services for parents who want their daughters to be circumcised?

As if it weren't bad enough that the circumcision of infants is being use as an incentive for maternity patients, inaccurate numbers are being cited to do it.
At the end of the author, Carlos E. Medina writes:
"A majority of baby boys, about 77 percent, in the United States get circumcised, but the rate has fallen from more than 80 percent since the 1960s, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The CDC recommends circumcision for a number of reasons, including the reduced incidence of contracting HIV infection from an HIV-infected woman."
He, either inadvertently, or quite deliberately quotes an inaccurate circumcision rate. This information contrasts with figures released by the CDC, which are actually much lower.

According to Reuter’s:

“In one survey, newborn male circumcision rates fell to 56.9 percent in 2008 from 62.9 percent in 1999. In another, rates of circumcision fell to 54.7 percent in 2010 from 58.4 percent in 2001. In a third, rates fell to 56.3 percent in 2008 from 63.5 percent in 1999.”

A stark difference from the quoted 77%.

Regarding HIV transmission, the CDC recommends circumcision for *adults* who are at high risk. It did *not* issue a recommendation for male infant circumcision, instead mirroring the AAP, which said in their 2012 circumcision policy statement that parents ought to weigh the evidence.
The AAP said in their 2012 Circumcision Policy Statement that “The benefits of circumcision are not great enough to recommend it.” The statement has expired, by the way, which leaves the AAP currently without a statement, so there is no actual recommendation from any respected medical organization that male infants ought to be circumcised. 
I wonder; was this information given to him by AdventHealth? Or does the author have ulterior motives? 
Let’s give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he just didn’t do his homework; the information is still incorrect and needs to be updated.

I have written a letter to the editor, but haven't yet heard back from them, and the information remains the same as of today. (July 6, 2019)

Related Links:
Ocala Star Banner: More babies, circumcision services return to AdventHealth Ocala

Reuter's: Male circumcision rates at hospitals dip: CDC

CNN: Rates of three STDs in US reach record high, CDC says

American Academy of Pediatrics 2012 Circumcision Policy Statement

CDC Recommendations Draft


Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , ,

Friday, June 21, 2019

Poetry Corner - Mutilation


In my last Poery Corner addition, I posted an original poem I wrote, expressing what I would tell a doctor should he have the gall to ask me whether I would let him circumcise one of my sons. I wrote a series of poems and song parodies for a contest that centered around male infant circumcision, which encouraged original songs, poems and parodies of other works.


This is my 8th and final addition to Poetry Corner (that is unless I get inspired to write more). It is a parody of a song called "Clandestino" by an artist named Manu Chao.

This song is sung from the standpoint of an illegal immigrant who moves back and forth over the border, hiding, changing his name, and moving quickly to avoid the law. (Original lyrics and translation found at the bottom of this post.

When I first heard the song, it sounded like the man was being accused over and over again. The hook of the song repeats the word "Clandestino" over and over again. I felt sorry for the character in the song, for his only "crime" was trying to earn a living most people who are immigrating "illegally" have no other recourse than to risk their lives.

I wanted to write a poem or parody of a song that reflected a similar plight; the innosence of young boys. In most cases, baby boys are born healthy, and their only "illness" from the standpoint of circumcising doctors and/or a circumcising culture is having a foreskin; anatomy that all boys have at birth.

The repitition in the hook of this song, the accusatory tone and feel of it, made me reimagine it as a condemnation of circumcision and doctors who perform it. I wanted to write parody lyrics to this song, especially taking advantage of the harsh, relentless accusation found in the hook, but something was missing; the song told the story of a man, and I wanted my parody to tell a story also.

I found my inspiration in the story of a boy who was circumcised against his mother's wishes.

Not too long ago, in 2010, the story of a boy in the state of Florida who was circumcised to his mother's dismay, made headlines. The boy was in the NICU because of birth-related complications, and doctors circumcised him while the mother was away.

This wouldn't have been the first case. In another case, courts let the doctor off the hook without paying any damages because it would "open the courthouse door to every kid who's been circumcised," and besides, "no evidence was presented to indicate being circumcised would prevent the youth from having a happy and productive life."


As if resilience from abuse were even relevant.

First off, the reasoning that "it would open the courthouse door" to others who have been wronged in the same way is a logically fallacious reason to dismiss an offense. (See Slippery Slope.) For this reason, courts could dismiss any other case. Imagine courts letting bank robbers and shop lifters off the hook because "it would open the courthouse door to every bank or establishment who has been robbed."




Having "a happy and productive life" is no justification for wrong doing. With the proper counseling, victims of rape and child abuse grow up to have happy and fulfilling lives, but this does not excuse the actions of the perpetrator.

No amount of counseling is going to give this child his normal intact organs back.

He's going to have to live with permanently marred organs for the rest of his life, and his parents are going to have to live with the fact that a doctor abused them and their child, and there is legally nothing that they could do about it.

Our society is ready to downplay and dismiss the forced genital cutting of males, even when doctors circumcise a child against his parents' wishes, and this is frustrating as an activist for basic human rights.

I wanted to write a poem/song parody which tells the story of children who fall victims of knife-happy doctors, and Manu Chao's "Clandestino" presented what I saw as an opportunity to both tell the story of boys like these, and to accuse circumcising doctors and their accomplices harshly.

To do this, I must reimagine the song to have two points of view.

In the original song, the teller of the story and the subject of accusation is one and the same; the "Clandestine" immigrant.







However, in my parody, while the story is about boys who are forcibly circumcised, I use the hook to accuse the doctor perpetrators, and expose the words "circumcision" and "circumcisers" for the euphemisms that they are. I am the judge, and in my parody, I do what the judges in these cases should be doing; condemning circumcising doctors for the charlatans they are.

Without further ado, "Mutilation."

Mutilation

Silent goes my screaming
Silent goes my struggle
Punished for the error
Of being born a boy
Fastened to a cutting board
I await behind closed doors
For docs to have their pleasure
I'm nothing but a toy

 I was born a c-section
Barely struggling to survive
The doctors couldn't wait
To have me promptly circumcised
My mom tried very hard
To protect me from the blade
But when her back was turned
Doctors came and had their way

 Silent goes my screaming
Silent goes my struggle
Punished for the error
Of being born a boy
Fastened to a cutting board
I await behind closed doors
For docs to have their pleasure
I'm but a doctor's joy

 Circumcision, Mutilation!
Circumcisers, Mutilators!
Circum-studies, pseudo-science!
Molestation, child rape!

 Silent go the botches
Silent go the murders
These men are in the business
Of mutilating boys
Burning with sadistic lust
They violate parental trust
They offer needless cutting
And call it "parent choice"

 Circumcision, mutilation!
Circumcisers, mutilators!
Snake oil salesmen, baby butchers!
Opportunist charlatans!


Original Lyrics in Spanish:
Clandestino
 
Solo voy con mi pena
Sola va mi condena
Correr es mi destino
Para burlar la ley
Perdido en el corazón
De la grande Babylon
Me dicen el clandestino
Por no llevar papel

Pa' una ciudad del norte
Yo me fui a trabajar
Mi vida la dejé
Entre Ceuta y Gibraltar
Soy una raya en el mar
Fantasma en la ciudad
Mi vida va prohibida
Dice la autoridad

Solo voy con mi pena
Sola va mi condena
Correr es mi destino
Por no llevar papel
Perdido en el corazón
De la grande Babylon
Me dicen el clandestino
Yo soy el quiebra ley

Mano Negra, ¡Clandestina!
Peruano, ¡Clandestino!
Africano, ¡Clandestino!
Marijuana, ¡Ilegal!

Solo voy con mi pena
Sola va mi condena
Correr es mi destino
Para burlar la ley
Perdido en el corazón
De la grande Babylon
Me dicen el clandestino
por no llevar papel

Argelino, ¡Clandestino!
Nigeriano, ¡Clandestino!
Boliviano, ¡Clandestino!
Mano negra, ¡Ilegal!

Clandestino

Solo voy con mi pena
Sola va mi condena
Correr es mi destino
Para burlar la ley
Perdido en el corazón
De la grande Babylon
Me dicen el clandestino
Por no llevar papel
 
Pa' una ciudad del norte
Yo me fui a trabajar
Mi vida la dejé
Entre Ceuta y Gibraltar
Soy una raya en el mar
Fantasma en la ciudad
Mi vida va prohibida
Dice la autoridad
 
Solo voy con mi pena
Sola va mi condena
Correr es mi destino
Por no llevar papel
Perdido en el corazón
De la grande Babylon
Me dicen el clandestino
 
Yo soy el quiebra ley
Mano Negra clandestina
Peruano clandestino
Africano clandestino
Marijuana ilegal
 
Solo voy con mi pena
Sola va mi condena
Correr es mi destino
Para burlar la ley
Perdido en el corazón
De la grande Babylon
Me dicen el clandestino
por no llevar papel
 
Argelino, clandestino
Nigeriano clandestino
Boliviano clandestino
mano negra illegal
https://lyricstranslate.com/en/-clandestine.html
Solo voy con mi pena
Sola va mi condena
Correr es mi destino
Para burlar la ley
Perdido en el corazón
De la grande Babylon
Me dicen el clandestino
Por no llevar papel
 
Pa' una ciudad del norte
Yo me fui a trabajar
Mi vida la dejé
Entre Ceuta y Gibraltar
Soy una raya en el mar
Fantasma en la ciudad
Mi vida va prohibida
Dice la autoridad
 
Solo voy con mi pena
Sola va mi condena
Correr es mi destino
Por no llevar papel
Perdido en el corazón
De la grande Babylon
Me dicen el clandestino
 
Yo soy el quiebra ley
Mano Negra clandestina
Peruano clandestino
Africano clandestino
Marijuana ilegal
 
Solo voy con mi pena
Sola va mi condena
Correr es mi destino
Para burlar la ley
Perdido en el corazón
De la grande Babylon
Me dicen el clandestino
por no llevar papel
 
Argelino, clandestino
Nigeriano clandestino
Boliviano clandestino
mano negra illegal
https://lyricstranslate.com/en/-clandestine.html
Solo voy con mi pena
Sola va mi condena
Correr es mi destino
Para burlar la ley
Perdido en el corazón
De la grande Babylon
Me dicen el clandestino
Por no llevar papel
 
Pa' una ciudad del norte
Yo me fui a trabajar
Mi vida la dejé
Entre Ceuta y Gibraltar
Soy una raya en el mar
Fantasma en la ciudad
Mi vida va prohibida
Dice la autoridad
 
Solo voy con mi pena
Sola va mi condena
Correr es mi destino
Por no llevar papel
Perdido en el corazón
De la grande Babylon
Me dicen el clandestino
 
Yo soy el quiebra ley
Mano Negra clandestina
Peruano clandestino
Africano clandestino
Marijuana ilegal
 
Solo voy con mi pena
Sola va mi condena
Correr es mi destino
Para burlar la ley
Perdido en el corazón
De la grande Babylon
Me dicen el clandestino
por no llevar papel
 
Argelino, clandestino
Nigeriano clandestino
Boliviano clandestino
mano negra illegal
https://lyricstranslate.com/en/-clandestine.html


Original Lyrics translation:
Clandestine One
Alone go I with my shame
Alone goes my condemnation
To run is my destiny
To evade the law
Lost in the heart
Of the great Babylon
They call me "The Clandestine One"
For not having papers

To a city in the north
I went to find a job
I left behind my life
Between Ceuta and Gibraltar
I'm a line in the sea
A ghost in the city
My life is forbidden
So say the authorities

Alone go I with my shame
Alone goes my condemnation
To run is my destiny
To evade the law
Lost in the heart
Of the great Babylon
They call me "The Clandestine One"
I am the law breaker

"Mano Negra*,"  Clandestine One!
Peruvian,  Clandestine One
African,  Clandestine One
Marijuana, Illegal!

Alone go I with shame
Alone goes my condemnation
To run is my destiny
To evade the law
Lost in the heart
Of the great Babylon
They call me "The Clandestine One"
For not having papers

Algerian, Clandestine One!
Nigerian, Clandestine One!
Bolivian, Clandestine One!
"Mano Negra*," Illegal!


*"Mano Negra" is the name of a French music group active from 1987 to 1995 and fronted by Manu Chao.


Related Posts: 
Poetry Corner - What Say Ye? Oh Doctor?
 
Poetry Corner - To Me

Poetry Corner - Circumcision Scar

Poetry Corner - Lullaby For the Damned

Poetry Corner - Song Parody: "My Foreskin Home"

Poetry Corner - Poor Little Guy

Poetry Corner - Haiku
Muncie Circumcision Case: HIGHWAY ROBBERY

REPOST: Of Ecstasy and Rape, Surgery and Mutilation
Related Links:
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Sunday, May 5, 2019

Poetry Corner - What Say Ye? Oh Doctor?



This is the seventh in a series of poems and song parodies that I wrote for a contest that centered around male infant circumcision. The contest encouraged original songs and poems, as well as parodies of other works. For my last Poetry Corner entry, I posted a parody based on poetry written by late American circumcision mogul Edgar Schoen.

This time around, I'm posting an original poem I wrote, expressing my disdain for the American medical profession.

At the time, I was still single, but I knew one day I'd be married and have children of my own. I knew that at least one of my children would be male, and that I'd have to deal with knife-happy doctors wanting to mutilate my son. (Or sons?) I wanted to prepare myself for the hypothetical encounter where some doctor or nurse came to us trying to peddle circumcision.

Having been an intactivist for some time already, there was already so much disdain I had for doctors who did this; for doctors who were in the business of hocking this needless surgery on parents of boys.

Of course, I wasn't even sure I was going to be a father, but there was so much I wanted to say to any doctor with the balls to approach me and ask me if I would let him take my son away and mutilate his penis. There was so much anger. There IS still anger. I can't believe this is happening in my country TODAY.

 "I may never have children, let alone a son," I thought to myself, but I wanted an opportunity to tell a doctor off, even if an imagined, hypothetical one. So when I wrote this poem, I poured every last thought I could into it; all the things I'd like to tell a doctor to his face if he or she dared TRY to ask me.

A doctor asking me to let me circumcise my son might as well ask me if I could let him rape my daughter.

The NERVE of nurses and doctors.

So this poem depicts what I would have liked to say in the hypothetical situation where a doctor or nurse approached me and my wife to asks us to let him mutilate my son.


What Say Ye? Oh Doctor?

What say ye? Oh Doctor?
Why must this child be shorn
of normal, healthy tissue
with which every boy is born?

What say ye? Oh Doctor?
Is he dying? Is he sick?
Is that a cancerous tumor
growing on his little dick?

And what say ye? Oh Doctor?
What prompts this "big decision?"
What ails this child today
that commands his circumcision?

Just what disease in newborns
is circumcision s'pposed to cure?
Why must healthy newborn boys
such needless pain endure?

More than urging parents
that they sign away permission,
Don't you need an actual reason
for performing circumcision?

Just what other healthy body parts
do you remove at parents' whims?
If parents came and asked you
would you cut off healthy limbs?

Since when does circumcising
healthy boys become your task?
Can you even be performing them?
Let alone their parents ask?

If there's no rhyme or reason,
Just how is it that you dare?
Come into my wife's room
and ask for what's not there?

Is it the child's well being,
or is it your thirst for blood?
Or is it for the money
why you say that this is good?

Are you actually worried
That this boy won't look like dad?
Or is it that you envy
the foreskin you never had?

Is it that you thirst and hunger
to inflict the pain
The same torture that you suffered,
on newborn babes again?

Just how is it called medicine
to mutilate the healthy?
To put newborns at needless risk
of death while you get wealthy?

How exactly is it, Doctor,
that you even have the gall?
To pawn these lies on parents
from door to door and hall to hall?

How is it legal for you to perform
this needless surgery,
let alone consult the parents
of the circumcised to be?

Profiting from needless surgery.
Is that not against the law?
In non-consenting individuals,
Is that not medical fraud?

In the end, what is it, Doctor?
What have you left to say?
What keeps this child from coming home
intact and whole today?

SHAME on you, Oh Doctor.
How could you sink so low.
Why the onus on the parents,
when it's YOU who's paid to know?

Shame on all these "studies,"
that seek to justify,
the blatant violation
of basic human rights.

Get thee OUT of here, Oh Doctor.
How dare you come into this place.
Boldly peddling your snake oil,
What a fucking sad disgrace.

Leave this place immediately.
Get out of here.  Begone.
Get this straight: WHEN HELL FREEZES OVER
will you mutilate our son.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)